Gregory F. Treverton[1],
Heather S. Gregg, Daniel Gibran, Charles W. Yost have authored a RAND
Corporation report titled “Exploring Religious Conflict”. The “new”
finding of this report, is an acronym “NRM” denoting “New Religious
Movement”, which, according to the authors, threaten to develop like
tumors into violent organizations (think “Al Qaida”), threatening the USA
and the rest of the world. Apparently this was the product of a 3-day
Worskhop of ‘intelligence analysts and religious experts’ on religious
conflict, hosted by RAND corporation (estimated cost to the US taxpayer:
$100,000). This report is interesting primarily because it either plumbs
depths of incompetence hitherto unreached by the American “Strategic
Affairs” community, or caters to a strange combination of Marxist
Communist and extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalist propaganda. It
appears that RAND has “found” religion and joined another “NRM”: New
Religious Media

What is cited as the intellectual foundation of the
report is (University of California leftist academic ) Mark
Juergensmeyer’s concept of “Cosmic War”. Is this just an attempt to go one
better on Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations”? Hard to tell, but
the reader is welcome to try:

“This concept refers to the metaphysical battle between the forces of Good
and Evil that enlivens the religious imagination and compels violent
action. Cosmic war has roots in the theology of most religions. In the
three monotheistic religions, it is the Day of Judgment, the cosmic battle
between Good and Evil, and the realization of God’s ultimate purpose for
His creation. In Hinduism and Buddhism, it is the perennial struggle to
exit the Wheel of Existences with its continuous cycle of rebirths in
order to return to Brahman or achieve Nirvana. Cosmic war ensues when this
inner conflict between Good and Evil becomes manifest – physical, not
metaphysical.”

If that doesn’t give pause to the reader who thought RAND was a
professional organization, the methodology, data, analysis and conclusions
of the RAND report certainly will. According to Treverton et al,

"NRMs (New
Religious Movements) can be found in Hinduism – the Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh or RSS, Israel (Gush Emunim), Christianity (the US-based Identity
Movement) and Islam, including Al-Qaeda, a global network with a
transcendant vision that draws support in the defence of Islam." And
added, “…Al-Qaeda cannot be defeated by force, but only by reaching out to
its roots in religion and promoting convergence of Christianity and
Islam.”

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had a succinct term: “weasel words” to
describe the contortions of left-wing “analysts” and Saudi-owned American
politicians to argue for appeasement of terrorism. For those who might
depend on RAND for information, let us point out that Al Qaeda is
considered to be a 1992 or 1996 invention. The timing coincided with the
end of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, when the Pakistani ISI,
funded by the unwitting American taxpayer through the largesse of
“experts” like RAND’s, helped to turn weapons, training and the surviving
hordes of Islamic extremists brainwashed in the madarssas of Pakistan,
against the Infidels of the West – viz, America. Now let us examine RAND’s
list of “New Religious Movements” that Treverton et al try to club with Al
Qaeda – both for what it includes, and what it omits.

The
report’s contribution is a false generalization on metaphysical, co(s)mic
war, flippant comparisons unrelated to cultural or civilizational
contexts. There is little evidence of analytical rigor and virtually no
empirical basis. Lacking original thought or evidence, the report
trivializes the threat of terror with the arbitrary choice of 'New
Religious Movements' (NRMs) cited as examples of a new innovative
category.

The
report appears to whitewash Al Qaeda, with its proclaimed mission of jihad
against the world, by clubbing it with a mishmash of socio-political
entities and obscure movements. For instance, “Gush Emunim” is an
organization of Israeli Settlers in the Middle East, with no evidence of
any axe to grind against anyone except those who try to oust them from
their homes. The “Christian Identity Movement” is a superset of weekend
warriors in America who don camouflage and prance around the pine forests
of Alabama or Idaho, imagining a world of “Aryan Domination”. And with
these is RAND’s amazing classification of the Indian “RSS” (Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh”) as a “NEW” Religious Movement! The RSS, just to give
Treverton and his gang of Einsteins a hint, was formed in 1925. That, per
the calendar normally followed even in California, was 80 years ago. It
predates RAND and Treverton by a long way. It may even predate the
American entities such as the Neo Conservative Movement, the Moral
Majority, and the Jubilee Mission Baptist Church. The RSS is the world’s
largest volunteer organization, with over 12 million volunteers. How RAND
came to the conclusion that the RSS is “new” and poses a threat to the
rest of the world, is a question that the US taxpayers who funded this
“Workshop” and “Report” may well ask.

Is
RAND trying to deflect the focus of American lawmakers from the focus on
war on terror? It was not too long ago that RAND’s Parachini noted:

"Given
the thousands of Jihadists trained in Afghanistan, the struggle with al
Qaeda is liable to last for a decade or more."

The
principal author of the present RAND report, Treverton, seemed to have
different ideas:

"Al
Qaeda may eventually be contained, but new threats are likely to emerge.
So the task is to contain terrorism; it cannot be rooted out. That task
sometimes requires military instruments, as in Afghanistan, but most of
the time it is a matter of patient, multilateral police and intelligence
work."

Garbage in, garbage out is the adage of the information age. Treverton
clarifies what he meant in the above quote, with his new statement in the
present report. Here is an example of terse observations and profound
policy recommendations in the present report:

"…Al-Qaeda
cannot be defeated by force, but only by reaching out to its roots in
religion and promoting convergence of Christianity and Islam."

Such a
policy prescription of Christian-Islam religious convergence has,
unfortunately, NOT been backed up by evidence and critical analysis of the
underlying causes and patterns of Islamist terror. After all, almost all
major terror events, recorded so far, have emanated only from Taliban
(that is, madarasa students) or traceable only to terrorists trained in or
with links to non-democratic, Islamist countries of Pakistan and Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia. What does ‘convergence of Christianity and Islam’ mean?
Should Christianity adopt Islamist jihad as a central doctrine?

When
they take a break from hallucinating on ‘cosmic wars’, RAND thinkers might
consider introspecting on the Hindu response to jihad in India for nearly
8 centuries. They may find it useful to refer to Andrew Bostom, 2005, 'The
Legacy of Jihad - Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-muslims,'
Prometheus Books. Al Qaeda is not another NRM, it provides the
justification for all the terror activities the world has witnessed so
far, be it in New York, Thailand, London or Ayodhya. See also Andrew
Bostom's 'Legacy of Jihad in India', July 2005 in the
American Thinker.

"Rarely understood, let alone acknowledged, however, is the history of
brutal jihad conquest, Muslim colonization, and the imposition of
dhimmitude shared by the Jews of historical Palestine, and the Hindus of
the Indian subcontinent. Moreover, both peoples and nations also have in
common, a subsequent, albeit much briefer British colonial legacy, which
despite its own abuses, abrogated the system of dhimmitude (permanently
for Israel and India, if not, sadly, for their contemporary Muslim
neighboring states), and created the nascent institutions upon which
thriving democratic societies have been constructed."

Dhimmitude:
the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by jihad wars,
encompassing all of the demographic, ethnic, and religious aspects of the
political system. The word "dhimmitude" as a historical concept, was
coined by
Bat Ye'or
in 1983 to describe the legal and social conditions of Jews and Christians
subjected to Islamic rule. The word "dhimmitude"
comes from dhimmi, an Arabic word meaning "protected". Dhimmi was the name
applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors to indigenous non-Muslim populations
who surrendered by a treaty (dhimma) to Muslim domination.

We
note that the project was funded by the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence
– the same people who did not see any threat in Mohammed Atta and Co. as
they watched them enter the US and “learn to fly” in 2001. One wonders why
the CIA Directorate of Intelligence would fund a public-release report,
especially with such a contortion of logic. Is this to impress the
taxpayer with the forward-looking attitude at the top levels of the new US
Intelligence Administration? Does the new CIA operate through public
conferences and reports to do its intelligence-gathering? Perhaps the more
relevant link to this report is from the creation in January 2001 of a
White House Office
of
Faith-Based and
Community Initiatives.

Religious Motivation of RAND’s Expertise

Many,
including the present author, believed RAND to be a secular, objective
think-tank. We were clearly mistaken. The experts who participated in the
workshop that led to Treverton’s Report have very clear ideas on how
Christianity should spread over the globe. Some quotes from their works
may be apposite. RAND should clearly be considered to be a New Religious
Medium of modern-day crusaders, producing a denominational newsletter. The
Jubliee Mission Baptist Church would be proud. Let us look at some of the
Workshop participants.

Moreover, conversions will swell the Christian share of world population.
Meanwhile, historically low birthrates in the traditionally Christian
states of Europe mean that their populations are declining or
stagnant…Christianity should enjoy a worldwide boom in the new century,
but the vast majority of believers will be neither white nor European, nor
Euro-American…But far from Islam being the world's largest religion by
2020 or so, as Huntington suggests, Christianity will still have a massive
lead, and will maintain its position into the foreseeable future. By 2050,
there should still be about three Christians for every two Muslims
worldwide…I dispute Huntington's assertion that "Christianity spreads
primarily by conversion, Islam by conversion and reproduction…No less than
Christians, Muslims will be transformed by the epochal demographic events
of the coming decades, the shift of gravity of population to the
Two-Thirds World. Muslim and Christian nations will expand adjacent to
each other, and, often, Muslim and Christian communities will both grow
within the same country."

Jack
Miles is best known for his
Website:
Author of: God: A biography, Christ: A crisis in the Life of God. He is
the author of: 'Ringing the firebell for freedom of religion - keynote
address: 'March of theocrats' Rally and Teach-in' (LA,
June 2005). Quote:

"We
are not alone, friends, but many who are our natural allies are asleep,
and it falls to us to awaken them."

Ian
Lustick’s views are recorded at this
website .
Guru that he is, Lustick comes up with some novel little ideas about big
world problems, like:

"I
supported the war [in Afghanistan] but I warned that we needed a
Goldilocks outcome and we didn't get it."

"I
think about terrorism in terms of popcorn. You can't tell which kernels
are popcorn and which are not, but you assume you'll always have some
kernels that are going to pop."

According to a book review by Joshua Sinai, Ph.D., which appears on
homelanddefense.org:

"Lustick
dismisses the concept of terrorism as a valid conceptual term. Instead, he
embraces what he terms an 'extensive', as opposed to an 'intensive',
definition of terrorism that is not bound by any limiting 'conditions'.
This, he claims, enables one to classify activities as 'terrorist' if they
encompass any violent 'actions and threats' by governmental militaries and
even 'tax collectors', as well as insurgents."

Thus
RAND’s new authorities on terrorism appear to such theologians or Jesuit
seminarians with their fire-and-brimstone orations of bigotry. RAND is
therefore appropriately branded as an extension of a seminary and an
entity not unlike the Seventh Day Adventists or Jubilee Mission. A New
Religious Medium.

"The
gem in the article is the account of how Iran-Contra criminal mastermind
and current National Security Adviser Elliot Abrams tried to reassure the
Christian Zionists that an Israeli "withdrawal" from Gaza will not
interfere with Jesus coming back because it wasn't part of ancient Israel.
Actually, this is right. Gaza was in Philistia, not Judah, which was to
its east. But for that matter, when the kingdoms split, the West Bank
wasn't in "Israel" either, it was in Judah... It has for some time been
obvious to me that the Bush foreign policy in the Middle East is driven by
irrational and often puzzling considerations. But I hadn't stopped to
consider, until Perlstein's excellent piece, that the White House is
trying to bring about an apocalypse that would hasten Christ's return. And
a damn fine job they're doing of it, if that's what they are up to. Why,
the place is more apocalyptic every day."
(Source:
Anti war website)

The
RAND report said: "NRMs (New Religious Movements) can be found in Hinduism
- the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS, Israel (Gush Emunim),
Christianity (the US-based Identity Movement) and Islam, including Al-Qaeda,
a global network with a transcendant vision that draws support in the
defence of Islam." And added, "…Al-Qaeda cannot be defeated by force, but
only by reaching out to its roots in religion and promoting convergence of
Christianity and Islam."

Convergence of Christianity and Islam? A breath-taking prognosis, indeed.
RAND should consider a larger workshop on this issue in the context of
jihad as anti-terror. Sure, dancing with the devil is an option when all
other options are not on the table. Seriously, does RAND endorse this
recommendation to counter jihad?

This
innovation of a new definition for a 'New Religious Movement' which
identifies RSS, Gush Emunim, Identity Movement and Al-Qaeda is, to put it
mildly, ridiculous, reducing the cosmic war of Mark to a comic war.

The US
taxpayer might have saved a lot of money by getting Treverton instead to
read to the CIA the report long-since published by Indian tank ORF
(Observer Research Foundation. They might have learned more about the true
nature of Al Qaeda and a vivid scan of religious conflicts. Indeed, any
academic worth his/her salt would have known the conclusion:

"Al
Qaeda is a revanchist organisation, which holds the West in general and
the US in particular responsible for all the evils afflicting the Islamic
world and for the decline of the political power of Islam since the end of
the Ottoman Empire. It wants to avenge the wrongs allegedly committed
against the Muslims since the end of the Ottoman Empire, re-write history
and restore an Islamic Caliphate from which Western influence would be
totally excluded. It is comparable to the Nazis of Germany in its
revanchist ideas and actions. The Nazis blamed the rest of the Western
world for the decline of Germany since the First World War and for all the
evils afflicting Germany. They wanted to restore the pre-eminent position
of Germany in the world. If the world leaders of that time had said "Let
us address the root causes of Nazism first, before we fight the Nazis and
Adolf Hitler", where would the world be today?

The
call to address the root causes of the Al Qaeda today is as short-sighted
as a call to first address the root causes of Nazism would have been in
the early 1940s… The conventional wisdom relating to terrorism attributes
the rise of terrorism to political, economic and social factors such as
perceptions of social injustice, violations of human rights, suppression
of the democratic rights of the people, lack of economic development
resulting in poverty and unemployment etc. It, therefore, holds that if
these so-called root causes are addressed, terrorism will wither away.
Does this theory apply to the Al Qaeda? No, it does not. If this theory is
correct, there should be no activities of the Jemaah Islamiya (JI) in
Malaysia and Singapore, the two most prosperous and progressive states of
South-East Asia. There should be no Al Qaeda activities in Saudi Arabia,
Morocco and Turkey where there is greater prosperity than in many other
countries of Asia and Africa. There should be no Al Qaeda activities in
West Europe where there is economic prosperity, greater social justice and
better observance of human rights than in many countries of Asia and
Africa. There should have been less terrorism in Pakistan because of its
impressive economic growth since 9/11, but its economic gains have had no
impact on its jihadi terrorists. The Al Qaeda is not fighting for
democratic rights for the Muslims. On the contrary, it is fighting against
the principles of liberal democracy on the ground that they are
anti-Islam…The world has much to learn from India. How to continue to keep
India such an oasis? That is one of the questions we have to address,
while drawing lessons for the future. We cannot afford to be complacent
that India does not provide a fertile soil for the Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda
may not be active in India, but many of the Pakistani members of the
International Islamic Front are. They could turn out to be the Trojan
Horse of the Al Qaeda. The success of the Indian example is due to the
success of its democracy, its non-military approach to counter-terrorism,
the role of the leaders of different communities in countering tendencies
towards religious or ideological extremism and the cultural unity in the
midst of religious and linguistic diversity in India."

Source:
see link
See also:
Symposium of RAND and
Frontpage: Diagnosing Al Qaeda "Given the thousands of
Jihadists trained in Afghanistan, the struggle with al Qaeda is liable to
last for a decade or more." (John Parachini)

Naming
the US-based Identity Movement in this category is also amusing and seems
to be only for effect, just to show that the RAND report is unbiased and
dares to include a christist movement also in the New Religious Movement
category. A fair appraisal of christist activities through various
denominations in various parts of the globe as baptizing missions,
proselytizers, evangelists would clearly have demonstrated the core causes
of religious conflicts created by such activities. That such large numbers
of christist organizations are left out is indeed strange considering that
the inspiration is drawn from the concept of 'cosmic wars' between 'good
and evil'. If christism is not a battle between Good and Evil, what other
religious movement, with the exception of Islamism, is? This mysterious,
unidentified 'Identity Movement' has been left undefined in the RAND
report, leaving it to the readers, congressmen, and policy makers to draw
their own conclusions.

The
absurdity of Juergensmeyer's analysis would have been apparent to any
student of theology, but since Mark wears at least three hats, of
sociology, of global conflict and of religious studies, his work presents
the potential for becoming the basis for any drastic conclusions and plans
of action by the intelligence community. His postulation should have
naturally led to the identification of Dalai Lama's Tibetan Lama groups as
a 'New Religious Movement' entering into physical conflicts. That the
report does not categorize these groups is indeed surprising. It is also
surprising that Mark does not even refer to sanatana dharma or dhammo
sanantano in the context of 'Brahman or Nirvana.' as 'exits'. We will not
digress by exposing the ridiculous nature of analysis by Mark referring to
'exits'. Unfortunately, Mark has not provided any evidence for this 'exit'
postulation.

The
logical application of Juergensmeyer's profound analysis of cosmic wars
and exits should have led to the identification of all the adherents of
Bauddha (aka Buddhism) and Dharma (Sanatana dharma or Hindu dharma or
dhammo sanantano) as prone to violence, manifesting evil in physical
terms, dramatically descending (by some unknown processes) from the
metaphysical levels.

Such a
framework should have normally led to the identification of the entire
spectrum of those seeking return to 'Brahman or achieve Nirvana' as a
cult. Unfortunately, this would be absurd because the 'cults' cannot be
declared as 'new' since both groups pre-date the arrival of Christ and
certainly Mohammed.

Why
Does RAND Squirm When Exposed?

When
the principal author, Greg Treverton was asked for clarifications, he
waffled with statements such as:

“The
press story is basically accurate, but its headline is not. The headline
implies we somehow link RSS and Al Qaeda. In fact, what we say, and the
story has accurately, is that many religious traditions have spawned "new"
religious movements, and we cite RSS as an example from Hinduism, along
with AlQaeda as one from Islam, along with Jewish and Christian examples.
We also say, and the story quotes, that almost all of these new movements
are non-violent. There is nothing to imply any connection at all between
RSS and Al Qaeda. Do have a look at the study.”

Apparently it had still not occurred to this uber-genius that the RSS was
created before he was born. When asked for detailed information on the
workshop and papers if any, presented, the response of Greg Treverton was
equally elusive:

"Thank
you for your note. You have the report, which has all the details about
the workshops."

Unfortunately, the Report authored by Treveton DOES NOT provide the
details, and he certainly implied that the RSS was not only new, but was
likely to become a threat to US security (what the taxpayer paid RAND to
explore). So much for the way RAND deals with comments provided in
response to the Report, even though the Report proclaims: "Comments are
welcome." So much for transparency in dealing with issues dealt with in
Terrorism and Homeland Security Research Area. See:
Rand.org

We
agree with Greg Treverton who said in another context:

"In a
world in which everyone is dependent on information processors,(the CIA)
should think of themselves as the shapers and verifiers of all that
information," says Treverton, now an analyst at Rand Corp.
See:
link

It is
therefore not surprising that the RAND has little information, logic or
evidence of intelligent information processing. The intent appears to be
that the RAND name and the CIA sponsorship label are enough to propagate
the authors’ personal religious agendas.

So DID
RAND “Explore Religious Conflicts”?

We
would have expected RAND to address the most serious issue of Religious
Conflicts with a careful evaluation of facts and figures. We find neither
facts nor figures in the Report. Here are samples of statements made and
opinions expressed, sans evidence:

"Are
there potential NRMs, even violent ones, apart from those spawned by
Islamic radicalism? The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in India, an
ultra-Hindu nationalist movement, is one such organization."

"…the
movement was banned for a few years by the Indian government because of
its acts of violence and terrorism and its exhortation to followers to
resort to terrorist methods in the promulgation of its religious ideas."

"…the
RSS continued to gain momentum and was engaged in violence, particularly
against what it viewed to be threats against the Hindu state, namely
Muslims and Christians. Their religious view, with its cosmic dimension,
remains a threat to the idea of India as a secular state."

"The
RSS is largely middle class, as is the BJP."

That
RSS has nothing to do with the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi and that it
was a movement born during the fight for independence of India from the
British colonial regime, has been recognized by courts of law in India ;
to cite Wikipedia, which is apparently beyond the means of RAND to have
looked up:

"In
1925, Dr. Balasaheb Hedgewar, a Nagpur doctor formed the Rashtriya
Swayemsevak Sangh. The word "Rashtriya" means "National," and the word "Sangh"
means "Union". The word "Swayemsevak" may be translated to mean a
self-reliant servant of the people and country, a volunteer in spirit and
patriot in action…The RSS fought alongside the Congress for national
independence…the RSS opposed the partition of the country, and is widely
associated with anti-Muslim riots and the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi,
it had in fact performed important work by serving the millions of Hindu
and Sikh refugees coming out of Pakistan, escaping bloody violence and
leaving behind ancestral homes in terror. Although there was no link
whatsoever between the RSS and Gandhi's assassins…" Source:
Wikipedia

See
what Jack Miles, an expert who participated in the workshop had to say in
another context:

"'Thus, in India, those who want to respond to Islamist terrorism
originating in Pakistan by reasserting the secularity of the Indian state
have steadily been losing power to Hindu religious nationalists of India's
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). 'Muslims are cancer to this country', BJP
leader Bal Thackeray said in a speech quoted in a recent issue of The New
Yorker; 'Cancer is an incurable disease. Its only cure is operation. O
Hindus, take weapons in your hands and remove this cancer from the roots'.
' (Larissa MacFarq1uhar, "Letter from India. The Strongman", The New
Yorker, 26 May 2003, pp. 50-57)."

Jack
Miles of course did not check, or did not honestly cite, the facts; Bal
Thackeray is not a leader of the BJP. Nor is he associated with RSS.

Has
Jack Miles checked out the figures of fatalities of terror attacks in the
Northeast and in Jammu and Kashmir, caused principally by christist and
Islamist terrorists?

If RSS,
an independence movement is categorized as a 'New Religious Movement',
shouldn’t the almost-as new George Washington and his band who desired to
create 'One nation under God' also get categorized as 'New Religious
Movement' under the Mark Jurgensmeyer's mythical theme of metaphysical
transforming into physical? What about the Daughters of the American
Revolution? By Mark Jurgensmeyer's definition, shouldn’t Protestant
movement also get categorized as a 'New Religious Movement'?

RAND
appears to be incapable of distinguishing between the Al Qaeda, out to
create a global Caliphate of one religion, from Israeli movements created
in self-defence against terrorists who would not hesitate to kill even
innocent children.

In the
face of sustained terror attacks by intolerant Islamists governed by only
hatred as their credo, two democracies, Israel and India have repulsed the
terror attacks despite repeated casualties suffered by them. Israeli
movements to defend their land and the Indian attempts to counter the
terror attacks have been remarkably restrained, facts which should also
have been noted by the RAND 'intelligence analysts and religious experts'.

RAND
should ask the 'intelligence analysts and religious experts' to
substantiate these bland statements by evidence.

Some
questions which need to be asked and answered by these analysts and
experts are:

-- Were these experts
named the only participants in the 'day-long workshops'? What are the days
when the workshops were conducted?
-- Were there any other participants?
-- Does the report represent the consensus conclusions and recommendations
of the workshop?
-- Were there any dissenting opinions?
-- Did the participants submit any written papers? (We have read through
the report again and have noted the bibliographical references to books
and monographs of earlier years appended to the report after end notes).
Were any other evidences and databases used for the serious conclusions
drawn in the report? It is important that all the papers be made available
so that the evidence used to reach the conclusions of the report can be
evaluated. Hopefully, CIA which has funded the RAND project will seek
answers to these questions.

Does
RAND Allow Data to Affect It’s Conclusions?

In the
face of terror emanating from Pakistan and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, it is
indeed surprising that RAND tries to invent phantoms of 'New Religious
Movements' based on a wacko thesis of 'cosmic wars' and exits to Brahman
and Nirvana. There is no iota of evidence produced by Greg Treverton's
reporting of conversations, to show that the proponents of Brahman and
Nirvana have contributed to the acts of terror.

Have
the fatalities of terror caused by religious conflicts in all parts of the
globe, been taken into account, for example, in just one country:

Note:
Are Naxals (Communist gangs) considered a cult or an NRM? RAND should
answer this question.

US
policy makers should take a fresh look at the problem in the context of
the "objective compilation from reports by credible human rights groups of
the genocide, ethnic cleansing, terrorism, and Islamist laws that Hindus
have faced in parts of South Asia where they are minorities." Source:
HAF "The
human rights violations that are occurring against Hindus must no longer
be ignored without reprobation," said Rep. Ros-Lehtinen after reviewing
the HAF report. "Hindus have a history of being peaceful, pluralistic and
understanding of other faiths and peoples, yet minority Hindus have
endured decades of pain and suffering without the attention of the world."
See
HAF
Release. RAND experts should review and evaluate the 190 attacks on Hindus
in Bangladesh from January 1, 2004 to November 30, 2004 detailed in the
Appendix of the Hindu Human Rights report 2004: (page
38). RAND experts should also explain the cosmic war category
which will explain these atrocities in Bangladesh against a minority
community called the Hindu in that state.

Are
the experts of the workshop conducted by RAND aware that there are a
billion people in India? And, have they computed the numbers of fatalities
caused by 'religious conflicts' worldwide and seen the fatalities of
50,937 in the last 11 years in India? Have the group studied the Terrorism
Whitepaper brought out by Govt. of India in 2002? Or, reviewed the
conflicts detailed in
South Asia Terrorism
Portal?

In
Buddha nirvana country, Thailand,

"a
current wave of jihadi terrorist violence in the three Muslim majority
southern provinces, which started in January last year, has already cost
over 800 lives of Government servants, innocent civilians and suspected
Muslim militants. This is directly linked with the presence of nearly a
thousand Pattanis (that is, muslims of Thailand so called in Pakistan and
Bangladesh) in Pakistan madarasas.” Source:
SAAG.org (15 August
2005).

There
is no evidence in the Report on the conflicts resulting from 'conversion'
activities by Christian groups. 'Conversions' categorized as 'propagation
of the Gospel', 'baptizing all nations', 'proselytization', 'evangelisation'
followed by threat of 'condemnation' of those who do not so spread the
Gospel or the salvific nature of Jesus. Such an exclusion of a whole range
of conflicts which resulted in the phenomenon of East Timor, certainly
draws critical questions on objectivity of the RAND report.

Without an analysis of the impact of 'religious conflicts', the RAND
report reads like a kindergarten account. Some remedial steps are called
for by naming the culprit experts and releasing their 'papers' presented
at the workshop and subjecting those 'papers' to critical, peer reviews.
After all, we are dealing with a serious issue of homeland security and
there can be no compromise with half-baked, opinionated reports based on
absurd, unfalsifiable, ridiculous cosmic fantasies.

Conclusions

RAND
should seriously review the 'scholarly' or 'expert' nature of the Report
in question and examine if it is consistent with RAND’s vision,
aspirations, and advertised credentials and standards.

It is,
indeed, shocking that RAND has recommend appeasement of the Islamist
terrorists.

This
report clearly shows RAND to be peddling a narrow, bigoted religious
agenda. That this is purported to be a preview of United States Government
policy in the future is indeed scary for those who believe in the
Constitution of the United States.

The
ludicrous nature of the report poses serious questions about RAND’s
quality controls, especially since the principal author is cited as being
a “Professor” at RAND’s “university”.

Copyright and Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and not of this
website. The author is solely responsible for the contents of this
article. This website does not represent or endorse the accuracy,
completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal, advice or
any other information in the article. Our readers are free to forward this
page URL to anyone. This column may NOT be transmitted or distributed by
others in any manner whatsoever (other than forwarding or weblisting page
URL) without the prior permission from us and the author.